Topic: A new rumor about the Revolution

[ShyGuy]

http://nintendo-revolution.blogspot.com/2005/10/revolution-to-be-least-powerful.html

This is the blog of that German Reporter who quoted Peter Molenyuex (sp?) commenting on the revolution.

[Dasmos]

I don't really care if the graphics aren't at par with Xbox360 and the PS3 just as long as they are greater than the GC. They're really not that far off next-gen graphics anyway. It's the gameplay I am looking for in the Rev.

[Bill Aurion]

So, uh, the graphics "rumour" is something we've known for a while now?  Oh wait, the 99 dollar price point bit...Hmmm, I sorta doubt it considering the peripherals being packed in, but anything can happen, I guess...

[Rancid Planet]

Oh I seriously doubt that the Rev will go for $99. Nintendo aren't going to take a loss for no reason. They'll be able to price the Rev way above that and still look more afordable than the x360 and the PS3. And anyway, a start off price of 99 smackers would just make the system look Y2CHEAP.

[PaLaDiN]

Yeah, that's gonna happen, the Rev selling for less than the DS.

[Nile Boogie]

Not that I beleive "$99.99" but if the NRS is nothing more than GameCube SP with a sick ass controller, I think they can come out the gate with a very actractive price point. Lets say  $229.99 and that inculdes a game. As for the graphic level, after seeing RE4 on the Cube, the NRS only need have 2 thing for me to really be happy with the looks. A crapload more ram (a gig?) and the rumored PPU. Thats really all I need.  

[Artimus]

They're going to launch at $199 like every Nintendo console has since they began making them.

[ShyGuy]

Well, we know that the Rev is going to have a new CPU and GPU called Hollywood and Broadway, so I imagine the graphics will be a bit better than cube. Interesting that he said the 360 graphics weren't much improved either.

[Ian Sane]

Not really a new rumour.

I can live with "two or three times" cube graphics.  My concern is more due to Nintendo losing support or losing sales because of it and the effects that has on Rev owners.  Nintendo didn't really make exceptional use of even the Cube's graphic capabilities (all the Mario games from Sunshine on didn't look so hot) so it's not like they would be affected much by it.  But as always what's good enough for Nintendo isn't always good enough for third parties and I don't want to see any third party not support the console just because they don't think there's enough horsepower under the hood.

$99 is insane.  That price is, as odd as it sounds to those of us with a brain, too low.  The general public would probably think the Rev is some inferior low budget machine with that price.  It's silly but the mainstream isn't exactly logical.  Nintendo probably can't afford to launch at that price anyway.  When it comes to price Nintendo just has to be comparible to last generation.  The competition is overpriced so Nintendo should be "normal priced."  Being even lower than any console before is just overkill and it's going to have the opposite effect of what Nintendo wants.  Was the Cube considered too expensive?  No, so the Rev won't be if it launch at the same price unless the thing has N64 graphics or something.

[Pale]

Ian's right.  Any business class would tell you that 99 dollars would cause it to sell poorly.  I remember hearing people at Gamecube launch using the fact that the X-Box was more expensive as a reason it was better.  It should be priced from 199 to 249 as others have said.  Cheaper, but not so much that it doesn't look like a real console anymore.

[kirby_killer_dedede]

As much as I would like a $99 launch price, I agree with Ian - it's too low.

And two to three times better than Resident Evil 4 is more than enough.  

[wandering]

I think the DS and micro have shown that Nintnedo has learned that, while having affordable systems is generally good, having a ridiculously low price point just for the sake of having a ridiculously low price point is generally bad. Personally, I think they're going to be aiming for a price point that's about half of the PS3's. So, anywhere from $150-$250.

[Avinash_Tyagi]

I agree with Ian...wait did I just say that?

But seriously, Ian's right $99.99 is too low, unless they only launch with just the console and make you buy the games, controllers and peripherals seperately.

[Ian Sane]

"unless they only launch with just the console and make you buy the games, controllers and peripherals seperately."

Oh God.  Not even getting a controller with it?  That wouldn't go over very well at all.  Let's just avoid a $99 price altogether.

[Avinash_Tyagi]

Personally i think they should do the console, one controller, Mario revolution, the nunchuck and the shell for $249.99

[ThePerm]

lol, well  we really only need a slightly  more  powerful system so  that crppy  devs can  make  every  game look  like re4 and that good  devs  can make games look better  than  that.

[Spak-Spang]

Why would $99 make it sell poorly?

I don't believe this number, but I think it would be smart, and here are my thoughts.

1) $99 is a price point that parents would by the system for kids, nongamers might take a chance with a new system. A gamer would spend to have an exclusive title and secondary gaming system.

2) This price can be easily obtained.  Remember Nintendo has invested and licensed the technology used to create the new controller, they didn't do all the R&D which saved them money.  If this new Hollywood and Broadway are just minor steps up above the Gamecube then once again we are looking at cost effective machine.

3)Nintendo could afford to take a minor loss to help jump start its marketshares, if the system cost Nintendo 125-130 to make, and they sell it for $99, then you won't loss too much compared to the market share you will make up.

4)Nintendo can make losses up in selling download games, controllers, controller additions, the new controller shell as well as games.  

5)If you are going to have an inferior system, people won't complain if it is priced at extreme budget pricing, however if it only minor savings then people will complain.  $99-$150 I will spend for a new system, but I won't and will never spend $399.  Several people will look at the price point and decide, this is better from me.

I hope this rumor is true, because if so I will be buying one with several launch games and controllers.

[Kairon]

The trick is finding the sweetspot, and finding the supplies to sell it.

Purely pricewise, 99 dollars may make it look too cheap in comparison, may hint at low quality.

But 200 bucks makes it look like just another console. Remember, by then the X360 and PS3 will have dropped prices.

My thoughts are on 150 bucks or a little more.

But then again, who cares how cheap it is if you can't sell them because you're having launch shortages?

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Ian Sane]

"If you are going to have an inferior system, people won't complain if it is priced at extreme budget pricing, however if it only minor savings then people will complain. $99-$150 I will spend for a new system, but I won't and will never spend $399. Several people will look at the price point and decide, this is better from me."

$200 compared to $400 is still a pretty significant savings and it doesn't create the stigma of a cheap console being inferior.

[Spak-Spang]

Yeah but $200 and $300 aren't that big of a difference (Base Xbox 360.)  

The $100 dollar difference people decided to go with the more expensive (more powerful system, it seemed like a better deal.)

Now, Nongamers aren't going to care about comparing specs.  They will want to buy something that is fun.  (Nintendo has that with their new controller, and the price makes it easier to swallow...its the price of an article of clothes or something.)  Then gamers will recognize it as a bargin to get a new style of play, and a cheap console.

Remember only the hardcore are willing to spend uber bucks on a system and not even consider the competition which is less.

[ThePerm]

mario will look perfect

[nickmitch]

I think that 249.99 (numchuck, shell, and free download(s)) would be good. That way you have a system WITH free games at a comparable price.  

[Rancid Planet]

Well you should never underestimate the power of a free game, that's for sure.

[TheYoungerPlumber]

Yeah, a free game of your choice (proably limited to first party games) would be good, and wouldn't *really* cost Nintendo anything.

[nickmitch]

I think that the game should be from a selection because it'd be silly if all the games cost the same.
If that preveously discussed points system comes true then a few free points, maybe enough for 2 NES games, 1 N64 game or 1 SNES game and a left-over point, would work.